The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1887-03-04
The Homes tead Again.

Many persons take only superficial or 4he-
sided view of the present homestead law. They
only look q. IL from the standpoint Of the in
diyidual who takes the benefit Of the law to en-
able him to avoid paying his debts and at the
same timo save homo to his family, forgetting
that probably BY doing SO he is robbing the
family Of his cree ditor Of q home. We know a
case in point, where man with large family
holds q note for 5000 against msn living on a
homestead Of real estate. set apart to him by
commissioners, that is well worth $4,000.
while the holder Of tho note is living on rented
land and his family is really in needy circum-
stances. And we are told by those who Know
that there are very many such cases In this
county. Now take the 5000 from the home
stead, aud give it to the holder Of the note, and
he would bo able to buy home for his family,
while the debtors family would still retain +.
homo Of moro than twioo the value Of the cred
itors, and without homestead law, the ofedit
of each one would be good for all neSeasary
supplies, and neither would be compelled sub.
init to the high prices under liens.
But that is only one view Of tho Injustice
and injury inflicted by the homestead. Let us
take another view.
Three men own individually to the limit of
the homestead, $1,000. or an aggregpe Of
81 500. Each ono wishes TO borrow $500, to
purchase supplies, and they are willing to en-
dorse for each other, but their combined nan cs
upon u note will not eommsnd the money.
and their only alternative is to give liens on
their crops. The $500 cash, would buy what
would cost $500 under . lien. Now lot us
make q calculation and SEQ if the homestead
don't stand directly in the way of tho prosper.
ity and independence Of these small or limited
land owners.
Tho first year one borrows 5000 on note en-
dorsed by his neighbors, the interest .dde d
makes it S220. This buys him supp lies tha,
would cost him $500 under lien, SO that he
saves $50 the FIRST year.
This $50 saved, il is legitimate to assume he
carrie, over to the second year, so that ho will
only hive to borrow Sl20-interest added
Sl32. With this $3.50 be oan buy whit would
cost Sl95 under lien, and saves sos, to be
carried to the next year, making the total saved
in two years $40, requiring q loan of only
S55 to carry him through the third year, and
|
priced supplies and high priced money.
With tho homestead standing in their uay,
the expenses Of each for supplies, in three
years, is nine hundred dollars, or S2,7Oo fol-
the three, when, il they could obtain credit
upon their property, the total expenses Of each
would be only 5000, or 81 800 for oil. saving
Of 5000 in three years by mutual assistance.
We have based our calculation upon the ex-
treme limit of the hou ostead, but the same re.
suits, in amount borrowed and saved, could be
secured upon q much smaller amount Of prop.
erty, if free from tho Homestead incumbrance
Much as we are opposed to the lien law, after
we'll considering tho workings of the kome-
stead law, We think it would be better the
county TO let the former remain and abolish the
homestead, or greatly reduce Its Init, The
lien would give the non-landswnsr an nssssl
credit for supplies, while, if there was b homo
stead the small-l landowner could borro, money,
aud in many instances assist WORTHY neigh
Dor to buy supplies "cheap for cash"